Dean is for a flag burning law.

[Renew Deal]

“I favor protection of the flag, but I do not favor a constitutional amendment,” Dean said Monday. “A constitutional amendment should be passed only in very rare circumstances.”

He said that he supported the resolution that passed both the House and Senate last week by wide margins. It voiced support for protecting the flag and suggested a constitutional amendment as one possible option, but stopped short of calling on Congress to take that step.

While the language in the resolution allowed both sides to claim victory in the contentious fight, it has also allowed some politicians like Dean to argue both sides of the issue.

“I do believe the flag ought to be protected,” he said. “... I don’t think you should amend the (U.S.) Constitution without a deep purpose. Protecting the flag is certainly a deep purpose, but I don’t believe you can amend the Constitution for that.”

http://rutlandherald.com/hdean/40656

[MIMStigator]

1. Dean wants to punish FREE SPEECH???

n/t

[Renew Deal]

3. I can no longer support Dean. He hates civil liberties..

and Dean and Clark eat babies. :evilgrin:

[goobergunch]

29. DEAN OPPOSES THE FLAG BURNING AMENDMENT (n/t)

[xultar]

2. Dean is arguing both sides of the issue...kinda like Clark..

He's against the amendment but is for protecting the flag. He believes that you should only amend the US constistution for a deep purpose but even though he believes protecting the flag is a deep purpose he is unsure if the constitution could be amended for that.

Did I get it...

He sounds just like all of the other Candidates.

Let's see those who flamed Wesley, Dich, & Dennis flame Dean.

You guys it's politicts. You are acting as if it is do or die. The candidates are all over the place on this issue.

GEEZ

[Scott Lee]

82. Lie. Clark wants a Constitutional ban on it, Dean does not.

Is that clear for you?

[Bread and Circus]

104. ooohhh... big difference.....

Dean supporters can never say he is wrong.

:shrug:

[realFedUp]

4. The real title of the article: Dean wouldn’t change U.S. Constitution for

flag.

[Padraig18]

8. Hmmm...

Dean bashers seem to have trouble with little things like that... :eyes;

[Renew Deal]

14. It's not bashing.

To me it is a non-issue. People asked what Dean thought.

[Padraig18]

40. How could they 'ask', when you began the post?

People can't ask, until the thread is started. Seems pretty misleading, to me, given that Dean said the Constitution should not be amended for this reason. :shrug:

[Renew Deal]

59. Actually it was asked

in the clark threads.

[Padraig18]

65. Then why open a new thread?

That would seem to violate DU rules.

[Renew Deal]

70. Because it was a different issue.

It was for Dean. It would have been unfair to him, his supporters, and the topic to bury it in another thread. See how this has thrived on it's own.

[Padraig18]

74. Sorry,

that's not the way the rules work. I've alerted on the post.

[Renew Deal]

9. That would be misleading.

We need to get to the heart of it and it is explained in my post.

[rumguy]

5. Dean is thinking and acting like a winner.

Protecting the flag is a good idea, as long as it stops there...but amending the constitution is nuts...

[DrFunkenstein]

11. "Protecting"?

This is a free speech issue. Is this like Free Speech Zones? - you can peaceably assemble...over in that marsh.

[rumguy]

16. A marsh is ok

as long as they provide you with some rafts...

[SammyWinstonJack]

80. LOL

[blm]

66. Protecting as in JAILING flagburners.

That's the bottom line.

[Scott Lee]

83. Your guy Clark is all over that one!

Remember, he wants to put it into the US constitution.

Dean does not.

Important distinction!

[blm]

101. My guy says flagburning is LEGAL and fought for that First Amendment

as much as the rest of the Constitution.

Kerry has always said its a freedom of speech issue.

Dean thinks its OK to punish flagburners with jail?

[Bread and Circus]

105. Dean such a genius....

He can do no wrong!

[DrFunkenstein]

6. Free Speech Or Not? Both!

Way to use your characteristically vague language!

All things to all people all the time.

[Rose Siding]

7. Your original title was accurate

Dean does not favor a constitutional amendment

Your catchier switch-up doesn't seem to be supported by the article.

[Renew Deal]

12. Sure it is.

“I do believe the flag ought to be protected,” he said. “... I don’t think you should amend the (U.S.) Constitution without a deep purpose. Protecting the flag is certainly a deep purpose, but I don’t believe you can amend the Constitution for that.”

[goobergunch]

13. Where does he say that a LAW should be enacted? (n/t)

[Renew Deal]

36. How else is he going to "protect" the flag?

A law at the state level I guess, even if it would be unconstitutional. Otherwise he is speaking out both sides of his mouth.

[Rose Siding]

35. "protected" ISN'T "protected by law"

[Renew Deal]

42. Then how else will it be protected.

I'd love to know.

[tsipple]

96. Social and Societal Disapproval

Ostracization. Ridicule. Denying the attention-seeker all attention. Issuing petty fines for littering (ashes) and/or environmental pollution. Posting the faces of all public flag burners on the Internet. (The VFW can do that.)

Stuff like that. Plenty of social firepower available, actually.

[KittyWampus]

100. Dean Supported The Resolution That Passed Congress

And when he says "Protect" I'm sure he doesn't mean Scotchguard... :)


Gov. Howard Dean said he doesn’t support a constitutional amendment banning flag desecration, but is
comfortable with suggesting it to Congress as the Vermont Legislature did last week.

“I favor protection of the flag, but I do not favor a constitutional amendment,” Dean said Monday. “A
constitutional amendment should be passed only in very rare circumstances.”

He said that he supported the resolution that passed both the House and Senate last week by wide
margins. It voiced support for protecting the flag and suggested a constitutional amendment as one possible
option, but stopped short of calling on Congress to take that step.

[tsipple]

111. So Congress Funds an Internet Registry Displaying Flag Burning Idiots

With special placement for double idiots who lose their eyebrows in the process.

Problem solved.

[NNN0LHI]

10. Does someone think anyone can get elected to national public office...

...and be for people being allowed to burn the flag? I don't think so. I think we had better get real here.

Don

[DrFunkenstein]

15. Hell Yes!

Honestly, I don't know where Kerry comes down on this, but I think Democrats should be the Party of free speech and the right to dissent. I am for protecting the Klan, so they can put their little confederate flags on their pick-ups, why not flag-burning?

[KittyWampus]

103. Kerry Said He'd Punch Someone Out

If he caught them burning a flag.

[xultar]

20. No I don't think the folks here can possibly get real...

They are jumping all over Dennis, Wesley & Dick when if you look at all of the other candidates they are just about the same. They say they want to protect the flag but...

All of the candidates are talking out of both sides of their mouth.

You gotta say the flag should be protected to get elected.

[Atman]

34. Yeah, god forbid a candidate explain the issue...

...to people as if they were grown-ups.

The free-speech angle CAN be explained to the Wal Mart Nation. It really can. Pandering and giving in is NOT the answer. As long as we never address what is behind issues like this, and just keep going with the flow, we wind up going where the flow takes us, instead of thoughtfully mapping out a course.

This is lunacy. Free speech or not? that is the simple question.

We are talking about burning a piece of cloth, nothing more. I find it equally offensive when I see American flag neck ties and do-rags, but is Dean advocating raiding the trailer parks and arresting people for bad taste?

I am completely serious...I find American flag underwear, do-rags, all that crap, very offensive. But hey...there is no constitutional amendment against being offensive, is there? So I mumble my contempt for the jerks, and live my life.

Why can't the GOP get this simple concept? Why?

[NNN0LHI]

49. Still don't get it do you?

People don't take the time to reason these issues out and come to a logical conclusion as you just have. They use knee jerk reaction, and believe what someone on TV from Fox news tells them to believe. Lot easier that way for them. Don't take much thinking that way. Its a shame. Its also the truth. Welcome to the real world.

Don

[ibegurpard]

17. I wish he wouldn't support the resolution.

I agree with most of this statement “... I don’t think you should amend the (U.S.) Constitution without a deep purpose. Protecting the flag is certainly a deep purpose, but I don’t believe you can amend the Constitution for that." except for the "protecting the flag is a deep purpose" part. The flag is a piece of cloth that has no meaning if people do not respect the values of freedom and democracy that it supposedly represents.

[Atman]

18. NOW who should I vote for?

DAMMIT, the democrats are pussies! WTF?!

What the bloody hell does this party stand for, ANYTHING?

[Renew Deal]

22. Lieberman voted against it.

;)

[NNN0LHI]

37. You got to be kidding me? n/t

[Atman]

43. Leiberman? Not in a million years

We are at "war" with the Muslim world. A Jewish president at this time would be the biggest possible can of worms America could open.

[goobergunch]

28. It's a misleading subject line

Dean OPPOSES the flag-burning amendment.

[Forkboy]

19. Your title switch

says much about your intentions.

[Renew Deal]

21. It's the national inquirer instinct in me.

:)

[Forkboy]

25. like I said....

[Guaranteed]

23. Are there any Americans left?

Are there any candidates who are against "protecting the flag?"

[Scott Lee]

24. some of you can't read, obvioulsy

Dean said he does NOT favor changing the Constitution to ban burning a flag. Clark DOES.

Any other questions?

[Renew Deal]

26. What's the difference?

[goobergunch]

30. /me is in complete shock by this question (n/t)

[ibegurpard]

33. OMFG!

are you SERIOUS?

[Renew Deal]

41. Of course.

What's the difference from being for the amendment to being for flag protection in general. Remember, Dean is against flag burning. He is against it in principal.

[ibegurpard]

55. I'm against abortion in principal

However it will be a cold day in hell before I would EVER support legislation that would infringe upon someone else's right to make decisions about their bodies.
The constitution supercedes all other law. Once it's there, it's usually there for good. There is no way something like this belongs in the constitution. And, for your information, I happen to think Dean is wrong on this issue but am very relieved that he would NOT favor amending the constitution over it.

[Scott Lee]

45. You're joking, right?

You don't know the difference between amending the US constitution and allowing states to make their own laws regarding flag burning?

Let me help you.

See, state law is always subject to the US Constitution - meaning if a state passes a law that violates the tenents of the USC, it can be challenged and struck down.

However, if you put such a law INTO the USC, you have taken away the check against it. Dean is saying no to a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning, but yes to the ability of states to sanction against it; knowing that those laws, should they violate the 1st, can be struck down. It upholds the principle of the 1st amendment while at the same time respecting state law. Ingenious.

Clark, on the other hand, goes right for the juglar and supports a Constitutional ban on free speech. That was not only dumb, I'm sure it lost him much support the second that news hit the wire.

[Renew Deal]

48. I know the difference but

isn't it just as offensive in principal.

[Scott Lee]

85. Hold it - I thought you said you didn't know the difference?

So which is it?

[Renew Deal]

97. I know the difference...

the question is do you?

[sandnsea]

32. The END is the same, the results,

Dean favors a law banning flag burning and it accomplishes the exact same thing as a Constitutional amendment.

Just like 1,001 other issue where Dean claims both sides of the issue before he sees which way the wind blows. Just like the way Dean governed Vermont.

[ibegurpard]

39. If you are seriously going to come on this board and try to tell people

there's no difference between a LAW and a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT then you need to go back to high school and take a few civics courses.

On edit: I wouldn't support either a law OR a constitutional amendment for this issue and it's obviously one of the areas where I part ways with Dean on an issue.

[sandnsea]

60. The RESULT is the same

That's what I said. Whether it's a Constitutional Amendment or not. He's saying he doesn't support a Constitutional Amendment because it doesn't rise to that level, NOT because he believes in the freedom of speech to burn the flag. The RESULT is what matters.

And do not get all fucking uppity with me, telling me how I'm supposed to act when I come on this board.

[ibegurpard]

63. It's NOT the same

And if you try to tell me that there is no difference between a LAW and a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT then I will get as "fucking uppity" with you as I want. There is also a big difference between support of something in principal and being willing to sign it into law.

[sandnsea]

77. I didn't say that

I said the result of not being able to burn the flag is the same. That is the issue. If you support the freedom to burn a flag, then you don't support EITHER the Constitutional Amendment OR a Law. How is that so complicated?

[Scott Lee]

27. Dean is NOT for amending the Constitution to protect the flag!

Be honest for once, please.

[Renew Deal]

31. What's dishonest?

I said he is for a law. I took it from his words. He didn't use law but he implied it. It is clear that he is against an amendment, but it is also clear that he is for protecting the flag.

[Rose Siding]

44. The best defense is a *good* offense

Clark favors an amendment and no where does Dean say he favors any law.

[Padraig18]

If he didn't *say* 'law'...

... then you made it up; you could not have 'taken it from his words'.

[Renew Deal]

51. How else is he going to "protect" the flag?

I am willing to hear suggestions.

[Padraig18]

67. Maybe with his body.

or maybe with a heartfelt speech. the point (and fact) is that he never said he supported an amendment OR law. Your subject line is deceptive.

[tsipple]

99. See Above

LOTS of options, all effective.

[Scott Lee]

50. What's dishonest is your implication

Dean can be for a state law to protect the flag. I would disagree with him. But notice he doesn't take the leap to a constitutional amendment like Clark does.

This is one more reason why Clark is gonna sink before he gets to the harbor.

[Renew Deal]

53. Or it is...

one more way that Clark is honest up front and Dean is not.

[Forkboy]

69. I dont see you can place such a premium on honesty

after you deliberately changed your heading in the way you did.

[Scott Lee]

81. Honest? About constitutionally attacking free speech?

That's Clark. Not Dean.

How's that for honest.

[Renew Deal]

84. You know Clark's position.

What does Dean's position mean. He is for protecting the flag. He is against an amendment. He is for a resolution to look into it. He thinks that amendments are only fgor serious issues. He considers this serious. He has no other constitutional option. What does this all mean. Will he end up being for an amendment or agianst since he has no choice. He is wishy washy. Clark is clear.

[Scott Lee]

86. Yes - Clark is clearly for constitutionalizing a ban on free speech

Dean is not.

[Renew Deal]

87. Yes no yes no yes no

This can go on forever.

[Scott Lee]

92. In the end, Clark favors a Const. amendment against flag brning.

Game over.

[Forkboy]

90. That is the only clear thing

Clark said he is for it.Dean's answer doesn't thrill me...Clark's is even worse.

[Bread and Circus]

107. But Dean is for a law to "restrict free speech"

Dean supporters just admit he was wrong for once
in your life for pete's sack.

Clark is wrong.
Dean is wrong.

There that settles it.

[Egnever]

38. Dean is wrong on this

And I will work to change his mind. Thankfully he has shown he is willing to do so.

[Renew Deal]

46. You are right...

Social Security, guns, medicare, Confederate flag appology. He's got more waffles than Ego's.

[Guaranteed]

47. He needs to take the high road on this issue. This is NOT a pandering

issue.

[Bread and Circus]

109. Yay! I think Clark is wrong too....

At least you are big enough to admit it.

[goobergunch]

52. TO CONTINUE WITH AN ACCURATE SUBJECT LINE, PLEASE CONTINUE HERE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=693609

[andym]

54. “I favor protection of the flag, but I do not favor a constitutional amend

“I favor protection of the flag, but I do not favor a constitutional amendment.."

However, the 1st amendment essentially blocks "protecting" the flag,
so the flag can't be protected without an amendment.

[Forkboy]

56. You should just admit that you started this thread

purely out of spite because Clark is getting some licks today.

[Renew Deal]

57. Actually no,

I started it our of fairness and because people requested it.

[Forkboy]

61. I'm sure

fairness was your intent...why else change the subject line? Sorry I had you pegged so wrong.........

[goobergunch]

62. Then why didn't you use the real headline for your subject?

When in doubt, that's what I always do.

As a courtesy to DUers, I have reposted this article with the headline as the subject line.

[Renew Deal]

68. The first headline like your post both sank like a rock.

I didn't want people to miss the nuance of Dean's position.

[goobergunch]

73. You could have used parentheses

Subject: Dean wouldn’t change U.S. Constitution for flag (implies law needed)

[Renew Deal]

79. Good idea.

I was actually in a hurry to get it out there. I never even thougt of it. Oh well. It will be a couple hours of flame war and then we will be on to our next one. :pals:

[Scott Lee]

93. Dean's words are clear -

He does not favor a flag amendment to the USC.

Clarks words are clear too. He DOES favor such an amendment.

Clear enough?

[Padraig18]

71. You continued a flame war by opening a new topic.

That's a violation of DU rules.

[Renew Deal]

72. Report me

I don't agree but can't please everyone.

[Padraig18]

75. I have.

:hi:

[Egnever]

58. Considering that the supreme court has ruled on this allready

I am now ok with Deans Stance on this as short of an amendment the right to burn the flag can not be taken away.

He is still wrong on it as far as I am concerned but as long as he stops short of an amendment to the contitution it has no teeth so It wont stop me from voting for him.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that flag burning and other forms of desecration are themselves expressions of free speech and therefore protected by the First Amendment. That means the only way to protect the flag is by amending the Constitution.

[Donna Zen]

64. Flag burning=free speech

IIRC, Dean's double take on this issue doesn't sit right. The reason the goobers want a law is two fold. One, the Supremes have already ruled that any law regarding same is unconstitutional. So, Dean must realize that any new law would have to come in the form of an amendment. Two, the goobers only do this to make Democrats look bad. The Democratic position is the correct one, but the repubs use this in their culture wars because a vast majority of Americans rise up for this hot button.

I'm not worried by either Dean or Clark when it comes to free speech. I am glad that neither of them are handing the repubs a club with which to bludgeon us. Finally, I don't see Dean or Clark signing an amendment. The bully pulpit needs to be secured and then used to educate the American public. The same public who run around buying Chinese made American flags and then letting them rot on their car mirrors.

<edit> Thanks Egenever. Dean either doesn't understand this, which I doubt, or is trying to have it both ways. Clark has been quite clear on the role of dissent in a democracy, and I don't see him backing off his position when push comes to shove. Again, should we hand our enemies their sharpest weapons. Or do we want to tell the repubs to shove the cultural war and talk about the issues.

[Scott Lee]

88. Good post - except....

You presumed that Dean inately favors a constitutional flag burning amendment (which he specifically said he does not). You come to that conclusion by noting that the Supreme Court has already made it clear that that any such "law" would be unconstitutional.

Don't you think Dean knows this? Perhaps he is, as one DUer accurately notes, unwilling to give the Rethugs a blunt instrument with which to beat him and at the same time secure in the knowledge that any "law" passed against flag burning will be smacked down as unconstitutional.

I give credit to both Dean and Clark for the way they handled this red herring of an issue, but Clark a little less so because he went so far as to support a Constitutional ban on flag burning. Dean knew better.

[dolo amber]

76. IT'S A FUCKING FLAG!!!!

It's a piece of cloth. Yes, it is very significant to large numbers of people. It's STILL a piece of cloth. Not a 6 yr old without health insurance. Not an 85 yr old who can't afford medication. Not a young married couple working 2 jobs each to stay afloat. It's a piece of cloth. I would be so utterly THRILLED if for just one second this country could stay focused on PEOPLE, and people who are ALREADY ALIVE, for that matter, and get over all these non-issues.

[StlDem01]

94. You guys need to chill.

All Dean said was that he doesn't support flag burning. Who gives a s***? Seriously. If I burn my flag in the backyard, the cops are not going to come and arrest me. Hell, they might join me! So chill out, and vote dean!

[Cronus Protagonist]

78. Dean and Bush disagree on this issue (pic)

Bush has no problem with flag desecration:

(completely unretouched photo)



Click Here To See Fair & Balanced Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

[w4rma]

89. As long as he doesn't doesn't support amending the U.S. Constitution

I could care less.

Dean wouldn’t change U.S. Constitution for flag
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=693609

[Freddie Stubbs]

98. Many members of Congress are on record supporting this

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=234

Including at least on the nine Democratic candidates for President.

[tsipple]

91. Hmmm... Lemme Consult My Issue List...

tsipple's Issue List in Mostly Correct Rank Order

1. War, dying, killing, and related matters.
2. Child welfare.
3. Civil rights, including due process.
4. The economy (stupid).
5. Promoting world peace.
6. Voting and democratic integrity issues.
7. Environment.
8. Healthcare.
9. Education.
10. Transportation (high speed rail, safer highways, etc.)
11. National and international security, including nonproliferation.
12. Space, science, research, and discovery.
...
50. Getting it on with Britney Spears. (Probability weighted ranking.)
...
1029. Finding the perfect hot chocolate recipe.
1030. Watching the season finale of Enterprise.
...
5322. Cleaning my navel.
5323. Paper or plastic?
5324. How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
...
7330. Writing to the U.S. Mint to suggest a blue colored two dollar coin with a hole in the middle.
7331. Flag burning.
7332. Solving the riddle: Why did God create the mosquito? What was She thinking?
...

Darn. I guess I'll have to deduct 0.00000000000000000000000001 points from my candidate scoring for Dean. :-)

[Bread and Circus]

108. Tsipple, I agree with you....

The whole flag burning issue is so minor.

Now that Dean supports laws to ban flag burning
and Clark reportedly supports a CA for the same, can
we freekin' move on to more important stuff?

[tsipple]

112. No, We've Got at Least 500 More Posts @ DU

Lots of folks have way too much time on their hands. Although I agree with your sentiment, would it were so. :-)

[Freddie Stubbs]

95. Kucinich voted for the Constitional amendment

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2003&rollnumber=234

Perhaps his stance on this will 'evolve' like his stance on abortion.

[Bread and Circus]

102. Thanks Bleachers, everyone is blowing this out of proportion..

but I guess now that Dean is for banning flag burning, it
is ok....

Dean is like an anesthetic for that which ails us. All hail
Dean cuz he can do no wrong...:think:

[Forkboy]

106. Thanks Bleachers

for posting a deliberately misleading and inflammatory article to take the heat off of Clark for saying he supports a constitutional ammendment.

[Bread and Circus]

110. Yeah, I guess Dean is the only one who can have it two ways..

about everything.